Blood flow in coronary artery bypass vein grafts: Volume versus velocity at cardiovascular MR imaging

Liesbeth P. Salm; Susan E. Langerak; Hubert W. Vliegen; J. Wouter Jukema; Jeroen J. Bax; Aeilko H. Zwinderman; Ernst E. van der Wall; Albert de Roos; Hildo J. Lamb

doi:https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323030289

Blood flow in coronary artery bypass vein grafts: Volume versus velocity at cardiovascular MR imaging

Liesbeth P. Salm, Susan E. Langerak, Hubert W. Vliegen, J. Wouter Jukema, Jeroen J. Bax, Aeilko H. Zwinderman, Ernst E. van der Wall, Albert de Roos, Hildo J. Lamb

Epidemiology and Data Science (AMC)

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Forty-nine patients with previous bypass surgery underwent coronary angiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of single-vein bypass grafts. Volume flow and velocity analyses were performed and compared on MR velocity maps. Bland-Altman analysis showed close agreement between the two types of analysis. Comparison of areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve revealed no significant differences between the analyses for detection of stenoses of 70% or greater. Diagnostic accuracy for volume flow and velocity parameters was 92% and 93%, respectively. Velocity analysis appears to be the preferred method, because it is less time-consuming and has a similar diagnostic accuracy to volume flow analysis. (C) RSNA, 2004

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	915-920
Journal	Radiology
Volume	232
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323030289
Publication status	Published - 2004

Access to Document

https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323030289

Cite this

@article{5812a450c970400cbaa63b89178c3c41,

title = "Blood flow in coronary artery bypass vein grafts: Volume versus velocity at cardiovascular MR imaging",

abstract = "Forty-nine patients with previous bypass surgery underwent coronary angiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of single-vein bypass grafts. Volume flow and velocity analyses were performed and compared on MR velocity maps. Bland-Altman analysis showed close agreement between the two types of analysis. Comparison of areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve revealed no significant differences between the analyses for detection of stenoses of 70% or greater. Diagnostic accuracy for volume flow and velocity parameters was 92% and 93%, respectively. Velocity analysis appears to be the preferred method, because it is less time-consuming and has a similar diagnostic accuracy to volume flow analysis. (C) RSNA, 2004",

author = "Salm, {Liesbeth P.} and Langerak, {Susan E.} and Vliegen, {Hubert W.} and Jukema, {J. Wouter} and Bax, {Jeroen J.} and Zwinderman, {Aeilko H.} and {van der Wall}, {Ernst E.} and {de Roos}, Albert and Lamb, {Hildo J.}",

year = "2004",

doi = "https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323030289",

language = "English",

volume = "232",

pages = "915--920",

journal = "Radiology",

issn = "0033-8419",

publisher = "Radiological Society of North America Inc.",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Blood flow in coronary artery bypass vein grafts: Volume versus velocity at cardiovascular MR imaging

AU - Salm, Liesbeth P.

AU - Langerak, Susan E.

AU - Vliegen, Hubert W.

AU - Jukema, J. Wouter

AU - Bax, Jeroen J.

AU - Zwinderman, Aeilko H.

AU - van der Wall, Ernst E.

AU - de Roos, Albert

AU - Lamb, Hildo J.

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - Forty-nine patients with previous bypass surgery underwent coronary angiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of single-vein bypass grafts. Volume flow and velocity analyses were performed and compared on MR velocity maps. Bland-Altman analysis showed close agreement between the two types of analysis. Comparison of areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve revealed no significant differences between the analyses for detection of stenoses of 70% or greater. Diagnostic accuracy for volume flow and velocity parameters was 92% and 93%, respectively. Velocity analysis appears to be the preferred method, because it is less time-consuming and has a similar diagnostic accuracy to volume flow analysis. (C) RSNA, 2004

AB - Forty-nine patients with previous bypass surgery underwent coronary angiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of single-vein bypass grafts. Volume flow and velocity analyses were performed and compared on MR velocity maps. Bland-Altman analysis showed close agreement between the two types of analysis. Comparison of areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve revealed no significant differences between the analyses for detection of stenoses of 70% or greater. Diagnostic accuracy for volume flow and velocity parameters was 92% and 93%, respectively. Velocity analysis appears to be the preferred method, because it is less time-consuming and has a similar diagnostic accuracy to volume flow analysis. (C) RSNA, 2004

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323030289

DO - https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2323030289

M3 - Article

C2 - 15273340

SN - 0033-8419

VL - 232

SP - 915

EP - 920

JO - Radiology

JF - Radiology

IS - 3

ER -